Sequencing-by-synthesis (SBS) generally refers to methods for determining the identity or sequence composition of one or more nucleotides in a nucleic acid sample, wherein the methods comprise the stepwise synthesis of a single strand of polynucleotide molecule complementary to a template nucleic acid molecule whose nucleotide sequence composition is to be determined. For example, SBS techniques typically operate by adding a single nucleic acid (also referred to as a nucleotide) species to a nascent polynucleotide molecule complementary to a nucleic acid species of a template molecule at a corresponding sequence position. The addition of the nucleic acid species to the nascent molecule is generally detected using a variety of methods known in the art that include, but are not limited to what are referred to as pyrosequencing or fluorescent detection methods such as those that employ reversible terminators. Typically, the process is iterative until a complete (i.e. all sequence positions are represented) or desired sequence length complementary to the template is synthesized. Some examples of SBS techniques are described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,274,320, which is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety for all purposes; and U.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 10/788,529; 09/814,338; 10/299,180; 10/222,298; 10/222,592, each of which is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety for all purposes.
In some embodiments of SBS, an oligonucleotide primer is designed to anneal to a predetermined, complementary position of the sample template molecule. The primer/template complex is presented with a nucleotide specie in the presence of a nucleic acid polymerase enzyme. If the nucleotide specie is complementary to the nucleic acid specie corresponding to a sequence position on the sample template molecule that is directly adjacent to the 3′ end of the oligonucleotide primer, then the polymerase will extend the primer with the nucleotide specie. Alternatively, in some embodiments the primer/template complex is presented with a plurality of nucleotide species of interest (typically A, G, C, and T) at once, and the nucleotide specie that is complementary at the corresponding sequence position on the sample template molecule directly adjacent to the 3′ end of the oligonucleotide primer is incorporated. In either of the described embodiments, the nucleotide species may be chemically blocked (such as at the 3′-O position) to prevent further extension, and need to be deblocked prior to the next round of synthesis. As described above, incorporation of the nucleotide specie can be detected by a variety of methods known in the art, e.g. by detecting the release of pyrophosphate (PPi) (examples described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,210,891; 6,258,568; and 6,828,100, each of which is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety for all purposes), or via detectable labels bound to the nucleotides. Some examples of detectable labels include but are not limited to mass tags and fluorescent or chemiluminescent labels. In typical embodiments, unincorporated nucleotides are removed, for example by washing. In the embodiments where detectable labels are used, they will typically have to be inactivated (e.g. by chemical cleavage or photobleaching) prior to the following cycle of synthesis. The next sequence position in the template/polymerase complex can then be queried with another nucleotide species, or a plurality of nucleotide species of interest, as described above. Repeated cycles of nucleotide addition, primer extension, signal acquisition, and washing result in a determination of the nucleotide sequence of the template strand.
In typical embodiments of SBS, a large number or population of substantially identical template molecules (e.g. 103, 104, 105, 106 or 107 molecules) are analyzed simultaneously in any one sequencing reaction, in order to achieve a signal which is strong enough for reliable detection. What is referred to as “homogeneous extension” of nascent molecules associated with substantially all template molecules in a population of a given reaction is required for low signal-to-noise ratios. The term “homogeneous extension”, as used herein, generally refers to the relationship or phase of the extension reaction where each of the substantially identical template molecules described above are homogenously performing the same step in the reaction. For example, each extension reaction associated with the population of template molecules may be described as being in phase or in phasic synchrony with each other when they are performing the same reaction step at the same sequence position for each of the associated template molecules.
However those of ordinary skill in the related art will appreciate that a small fraction of template molecules in each population loses or falls out of phasic synchronism with the rest of the template molecules in the population (that is, the reactions associated with the fraction of template molecules either get ahead of, or fall behind, the other template molecules in the sequencing reaction run on the population (some examples are described in Ronaghi, M. Pyrosequencing sheds light on DNA sequencing. Genome Res. 11, 3-11 (2001), which is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety for all purposes). For example, the failure of the reaction to properly incorporate of one or more nucleotide species into one or more nascent molecules for extension of the sequence by one position results in each subsequent reaction being at a sequence position that is behind and out of phase with the sequence position of the rest of the population. This effect is referred to herein as “incomplete extension” (IE). Alternatively, the improper extension of a nascent molecule by incorporation of one or more nucleotide species in a sequence position that is ahead and out of phase with the sequence position of the rest of the population is referred to herein as “carry forward” (CF). The combined effects of CF and IE are referred to herein as CAFIE.
With respect to the problem of incomplete extension, there may be several possible mechanisms that contribute to IE that may occur alone or in some combination. One example of a possible mechanism that contributes to IE may include a lack of a nucleotide species being presented to a subset of template/polymerase complexes. Another example of a possible mechanism that contributes to IE may include a failure of a subset of polymerase molecules to incorporate a nucleotide species which is properly presented for incorporation into a nascent molecule. A further example of a possible mechanism that contributes to IE may include the absence of polymerase activity at template/polymerase complexes.
An example of yet another mechanism that can account, at least in part, for IE errors in SBS methods may include what is referred to as cyclic reversible termination (CRT) as reviewed by Metzger (Genome Res. 2005 December; 15(12):1767-76, which is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety for all purposes). In CRT, nucleotide species have a modified 3′-O group (commonly referred to as a cap, protecting group, or terminator) which prevents further extension of the nascent molecule after incorporation of single nucleotide species. These protecting groups are designed to be removable by one of a variety of methods including chemical treatment or light treatment. Upon deprotection of the 3′-O position (and creation of a 3′-OH group), the nascent molecule can be extended by another nucleotide specie. However, phasic asynchronism will occur when a fraction of nascent molecules remain protected due to imperfect deprotection efficiency (incomplete deprotection). In the subsequent cycle, this fraction of nascent molecules, remaining protected, will not be extended, and will thus fall behind and out of phase with the sequence position of the rest of the population. However, subsequent deprotection steps may successfully remove at least some of the protecting groups which had previously improperly remained, causing extension to resume, and creating signals from nascent molecules and continue to be out of phasic synchrony with the rest of the population. Those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that other factors that contribute to IE may exist and thus are not limited to the examples provided above.
The systems and methods of the presently described embodiments of the invention are directed to the correction IE errors that may arise from any such single or combined causes or mechanisms. For instance, the correction of IE errors caused by a coupling of incomplete deprotection and subsequent successful deprotection is one object of the present invention.
With respect to the problem of CF, there may be several possible mechanisms that contribute to CF that may occur alone or in some combination. For example, one possible mechanism may include excess nucleotide species remaining from a previous cycle. This can occur because the washing protocol performed at the end of a cycle will remove the vast majority, but not necessarily all, of the nucleotide species from the cycle. In the present example a result could include a small fraction of an “A” nucleotide species present in a “G” nucleotide species cycle, leading to extension of a small fraction of the nascent molecule if a complementary “T” nucleotide species is present at the corresponding sequence position in the template molecule. Another example of a possible mechanism causing a carry forward effect may include polymerase error, such as the improper incorporation of a nucleotide species into the nascent molecule that is not complementary to the nucleotide species on the template molecule.
An example of yet another mechanism that can account, at least in part, for CF in SBS methods include cyclic reversible termination (CRT) as reviewed by Metzger (Genome Res. 2005 December; 15(12):1767-76, incorporated by reference above). In the present example, as described above with respect to IE a preparation of 3′-O protected nucleotide species may be employed where some fraction of the nucleotide molecules will lack a protecting group, or have lost the protecting group. Loss of the protecting group may also occur during the sequencing process prior to the intended deprotecting step. Any such lack of a deprotecting group will cause some nascent molecules to be extended by more than one nucleotide species at a time. Such improper multiple extension of a fraction of nascent molecules cause them to move ahead in sequence position and out of phase with the sequence position of the rest of the population. Thus, unprotected nucleotides, and/or prematurely deprotected nucleotides, may contribute, at least in part, to CF in SBS methods involving CRT.
The systems and methods of the presently described embodiments of the invention are directed to the correction of CF errors that may arise from any such single or combined causes or mechanisms. For example, the correction of CF errors that arise due to a lack of protecting groups is one object of the present invention.
Further, the systems and methods of the presently described embodiments of the invention are directed to the correction of both IE errors and CF errors, wherein both types of errors may occur in some combination for a population in the same sequencing reaction. For example, IE and CF may each arise from single or combined causes or mechanisms as described above.
Those of ordinary skill will appreciate that a potential for both IE and CF errors may occur at each sequence position during an extension reaction and thus may have cumulative effects evident in the resulting sequence data. For example, the effects may become especially noticeable towards the end of a series of sequencing reactions, which is also sometimes referred to as a “run” or “sequencing run”. Further, IE and CF effects may impose an upper limit to the length of a template molecule that may be reliably sequenced (sometimes referred to as the “read length”) using SBS approaches, because the quality of the sequence data decreases as the read length increases.
For example, one method of SBS may generate sequence data comprising over 25 million sequence positions in a typical run with what is referred to as a “Phred” quality score of 20 or better (a Phred quality score of 20 infers that the sequence data is predicted to have an accuracy of 99% or higher). While the overall sequencing throughput with Phred 20 quality for the SBS method is significantly higher than that of sequence data generated by what is known to those in the art as Sanger sequencing methods that employ a capillary electrophoresis technique, it is currently at the cost of substantially shorter read lengths for the SBS method (Margulies et al., 2005, Nature 437: 376-80, which is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety for all purpose). Thus increasing the upper limit of the read lengths by avoiding or correcting for degradation of the sequence data produced by IE and CF errors would result in an increase in the overall sequencing throughput for SBS methods.
Therefore, it is desirable to provide systems and methods directed to correcting for IE and/or CF errors in sequence data produced by sequencing-by-synthesis methods of nucleic acid sequencing.
A number of references are cited herein, the entire disclosures of which are incorporated herein, in their entirety, by reference for all purposes. Further, none of these references, regardless of how characterized above, is admitted as prior art to the invention of the subject matter claimed herein.